Categories
Philosophy

Analyze author’s argument

500-700 words a rhetorical analysis of op-ed style essay
identify author’s rhetorical appeals/choices
examine the rhetorical context, including racial, social, gender, and power dynamics
identify audience and purpose
analyze author’s argument
read chapter 1 of race a philosophical introduction by paul c taylor
Divide the piece into sections, such as
the topic of the paper;
quality of the source/author credibility (Ethos);
the way that author uses emotional appeal and whether that is acceptable (Pathos);
the position that author rejects, author’s main thesis and reasons (premises) to support the thesis (Logos).
Assess the strength of the argument: do you agree or disagree with the author, and why? Did you find the author’s argumentative approach and style effective or not, and why?

Categories
Philosophy

What questions does it raise?

Choose either Glaucon and Adeimantus and describe the city they found. What are its features, what is its justification? In what sense is this city just? What is missing or inadequate about it? What questions does it raise?

Categories
Philosophy

I still reccomend you read all of phaedo because it will be useful for contect purposes and for the summary.

Hi,
I am in need of a writer who is familiar with Plato’s Phaedo. You will be writing a summary and a reflection, which will both equal to around 1500 words (so the summary can be 750 and the reflection 750 words). The reading i have chosen is Platos, Phaedo. I am aware that this reading is quite long and there are many arguments in it, so I selected his last argument to do the reflective summary on which can be found roughly between 102b-107b. I still reccomend you read all of Phaedo because it will be useful for contect purposes and for the summary. I have attatched Phaedo, which starts on page 93 of the book. I also attatched an example of what a reflective summary should be, and I have written all the instructions below. PLEASE CAREFULLY READ ALL THE INSTRUCTIONS:
Format and Requirements:
The Reflective Summary should include the following information at the top of the first page:
– The title of the work (Plato, Phaedo),
– The word count: RS should be no more than 1500 words in length. The information at the top of the first page doesn’t count towards the word limit
– The Reflectove Summary should be divided into two sections, with one section labelled Summary and the other section labelled Reflection.

The summary should not contain direct quotes, secondary sources, footnotes or endnotes. The reflection may include direct quotes or secondary sources but you should only use them if they are necessary for developing your position or argument.
Citations: When you cite Plato, you must use the Stephanus pagination (the numbers in the margins of our text). For example, if you were summarizing or discussing the first sentence from the Euthyphro (“What’s new, Socrates, to make you leave the Lyceum, where you usually spend your time, to spend it hear today at the King Archon?”), you would cite it as “(Euthyphro 2a)”. If all of your citations are from a single text, you don’t need to include the title of the work (i.e. you could just write “(2a)”)
Summary:
– Summarize, (1) in your own words, (2) the main conclusion being argued for and (3) the specific assumption(s), or arguments
that the author puts forward in support of that position.
Pro-Tip: Before you start your summary, read through the text at least twice. The first time
that you read the article try to get a sense of the overall objectives and structure of the argument. Once you have a sense of what the author is trying to accomplish, you can go through the reading again and decide what should be included in the summary. You don’t have to summarize every point that the author makes. The best summaries are concise.
– Present the most charitable position you can while summarizing. (Imagine the author was reading your paper, you’d want them to feel like you treated them fairly).
Reflection:
(1) You took a definite position at the beginning of the reflection portion.
(2) Your argument adds something to the conversation you summarized. Discussing strengths and weaknesses of the argument you are responding to is a good way to put your own thought in the context of an ongoing conversation.
(3) It is clear who you disagree with and why you disagree.
Pro-Tip: Before you start your reflection ask yourself if you agree with the author’s position
or arguments (note: it’s possible to agree with an author’s thesis but also think that his/her arguments fail to establish that position). If you disagree with the author’s position/arguments, you could write a reflection that outlines the problems. If you agree with an author’s position/arguments, you could write a reflection that raises an objection and then responds to that objection. A thought provoking reflection usually has one or more of the following:
– An original and crucial criticism of a technical move in someone’s
argument,
– A well-developed, creative and compelling example or thought experiment,
– An application of theoretical distinctions to the “real world”.
– A set of reasons for favoring one interpretation of a work over another
– Don’t try to discuss or criticize every point that the author makes. Focus on a single point or argument. In a reflection depth is better than breadth.
– Always assume the reader disagrees with you. Your job in the reflection is to convince the reader that you are right.
Writing Quality: The paper was easy to read, properly cited, grammatically correct, politically correct, and used technical terms appropriately.
Pro-Tip:
– Write in short sentences. Semi-colons aren’t impressive.
– Use first-person and present-tense phrases like: “I argue that…”
– Don’t use man or mankind to refer to all human beings. Feel free to use she or
they instead of he in examples or when you need to use a third-person pronoun to
make a general claim about human beings.
– It’s okay to be boring. Refrain from using “flowery” language.
– Use technical terms when necessary but outside of technical terms don’t try to use
a “fancy” vocabulary. Clarity is the most important thing.
– Proper citation is always necessary in academic writing.

– Proof read, preferably out loud and more than once. On important papers, editing
can take as long as writing.

Categories
Philosophy

This report should be summarized to not more than 5 pages, double-spaced, times new roman and font 12.

Universal Problem & Solution God’s covenant with Abraham & the role of the Patriarchs God’s Character Personal Reflection Assignment Due (10%) • Articulate the universal problem and universal solution as presented in Genesis chapters 1-11 • Analyze the content of God’s covenant with Abraham as presented in Gen. 12:1-3 and Gen. 15. • Demonstrate the application of biblical response to temptation using the story of Joseph. • Summarize the character of God as presented in Genesis 1-50. (ELO 3, 4, 5, 6) Scripture reading Class discussions Review the results of the tutorial process for the week ending and clarify issues on the tutorial sessions, give comments, address concerns. Treat your studies this semester at Daystar as a critical juncture in your life and work out a personal reflection comprised of a) Personal SWOT analysis b) Analysis and reflection upon significant personal experiences whether blessings or challenges, family background, gender, abilities and capabilities, opportunities, mistakes, etc. in the light of the fact that God is good to all people c) What do you consider to be God’s reason/purpose for you being born and placing you in your generation and this world?. Present a summary report of this assignment to the lecturer for grading. Consider this to be a serious assignment.: It is a deep spiritual engagement with yourself, your Creator and your historical past. So, take it seriously, thoughtfully and prayerfully for maximum benefit. Since the assignment might contain deeply personal information and self-disclosure, the lecturer commits himself to treat it with maximum confidentiality. Nevertheless, if you feel that some details are best left out of third-party consumption, feel free to leave these out on condition that you still thoroughly reflect upon them. This report should be summarized to not more than 5 pages, double-spaced, Times New Roman and font 12. This report should be summarized to not more than 5 pages, double-spaced, Times New Roman and font 12.

Categories
Philosophy

Also needs to be a single spaced page of about 500 words.

I have a few pieces of literature, roughly 200 pages, that I must read and summarize into a single page of around 500 words and tie it in to this week’s topic which is: Existence and Existentialism. Then I need a second page which is a “critical address” of the readings which is essentially just a reflection, thoughts, and comments. Also needs to be a single spaced page of about 500 words. Short deadline but super simple project if any professor is interested. All readings are linked/attached (assuming you guys can see/access the attachments) 1 of the readings: chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www2.hawaii.edu/~freeman/courses/phil360/16.%20Myth%20of%20Sisyphus.pdf 2: https://www.kafka-online.info/the-trial.html

Categories
Philosophy

Assignment purpose: this assignment will allow you to explore the online presence of world-class museums, and thereby gain more depth in understanding the cultures and periods under consideration for the week.

Write a 300-word minimum personal response to the online tour of the Huntington Library. Your response must have two components: (1) a summary of a few artifacts in light of this week’s course material (including cultures and dates/periods), and (2) a personal reflection on the chosen artifacts and on the museum itself. Please provide links to the artifacts you highlight in your Museum Tour Response. Your response is due by Tuesday, October 4. Assignment purpose: This assignment will allow you to explore the online presence of world-class museums, and thereby gain more depth in understanding the cultures and periods under consideration for the week. This will be accomplished by following the link given in the “Online Museum Tour” section of the week’s Learning Activities. (course objectives 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 3.2, 4.4) Grading: The Museum Tour Response must meet the 300-word minimum. A deduction of 10 points per 50 words short will be applied. A minimum of two artifacts must be addressed in the response (including a hyperlink to each artifact). An automatic 10-point deduction will be applied if only one artifact is addressed, and a 25-point deduction will be applied if no particular artifacts are addressed in the response. “Exhibits” do not count as individual artifacts. The response is to be written in complete sentences, including proper grammar and spelling. Excessive writing errors will result in a deduction.

Categories
Philosophy

Outside and seeing that it was sunny.

In 250-300 words (about 1 page, double spaced, 1 inch margin paper) answer the
following questions:
According to Descartes, why does he feel the need to get rid of all of his beliefs? Suppose I have
the belief that it is sunny outside. Furthermore, suppose that I formed this belief after walking
outside and seeing that it was sunny. According to Descartes why can’t we rely on our senses to
justify this sort of belief? Explain. Descartes talks about an evil genius/demon that is as
powerful as God, but evil. What is Descartes’ purpose for talking about such a being





Categories
Philosophy

How would paley and other fans of the teleological argument explain all of this?

Professor’s instructions below:
Watch the following video:

Describe how the objects and events in the video are interconnected. How would Paley and other fans of the teleological argument explain all of this? What would they say must have created all of these creatures and caused them to behave this way? Be sure to explain the main parts of the teleological argument. Then, give another example of something in nature that appears to operate according to a design. How does it appear to function according to a plan? Write 2-3 paragraphs. Begin typing your answer below.

Categories
Philosophy

One is the argument from recollection, which is discussed from 72e-78b.

In Plato’s Phaedo, Socrates presents several arguments for the immortality of the soul. One is the argument from recollection, which is discussed from 72e-78b. Write a Three Paragraph Paper, in the “Two Reasons” format (see “Essays” handout): ¶1. Reconstruction: Fully, fairly, and in your own words, reconstruct Socrates’s Recollection Argument for the conclusion that the soul is immortal. ¶2. First Objection: Reconstruct the objection raised by Simmias (77a-b), according to which the Recollection Argument doesn’t show that the soul survives death. ¶3. Second Objection: Present a second, distinct, objection to the ¶1 argument. (Present only one objection in this section!) All told, the paper should come in at roughly 1,000 words.

Categories
Philosophy

State and explain why popper rejects scientific reasoning by induction.

TOPIC:
Karl Popper argues that scientists never proceed by confirming the truth of theories. Instead, they engage in a practice called falsificationism. State and explain why Popper rejects scientific reasoning by induction. Explain how the logic of falsificationism is supposed to work. If scientists don’t ever confirm the truth of theories, what does Popper think they do instead? Does falsificationism accurately describe how scientists reason about evidence and theory? Illustrate the problem of auxiliary hypotheses with an example from class or one of your own. (Be clear what the hypothesis is and what the auxiliary hypothesis is.) Discuss whether falsificationism is useful in guiding scientific preference between a corroborated hypothesis and a brand new hypothesis. How serious of a problem do think these challenges are to Popper’s view? What lessons should we draw about the role of formal logic in scientific reasoning about evidence and theory?
INSTRUCTIONS:
The paper should be typed, double-spaced with margins of reasonable size. I am looking for clear, focused, and critical discussion of the assertions and arguments raised by the topic. I am not asking for, and do not want to see, discussions of the general area of the topic including discussions of its importance or interest. Your paper should address the issues raised by the topic (and possibly other issues directly arising from those included in the assignment). If you quote, paraphrase, or refer to particular passages from the reading, or any other source, please give reference. It is virtually impossible for your paper to be too narrowly focused.
t to see, discussions of the general area of the topic including discussions of its importance or interest. Your paper should address the issues raised by the topic (and possibly other issues directly arising from those included in the assignment). If you quote, paraphrase, or refer to particular passages from the reading, or any other source, please give reference. It is virtually impossible for your paper to be too narrowly focused.